MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4391344451 · doi:10.1101/2024.01.29.24301589

Core outcome sets for trials of interventions to prevent and to treat multimorbidity in low- and middle-income countries: the COSMOS study

2024· preprint· en· W4391344451 sur OpenAlexaff
Aishwarya Lakshmi Vidyasagaran, Rubab Ayesha, Jan R. Boehnke, Jamie J Kirkham, Louise Rose, John R. Hurst, J. Jaime Miranda, Rusham Zahra Rana, Rajesh Vedanthan, Mehreen Riaz Faisal, Najma Siddiqi

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChronic Disease Management Strategies
Établissements canadiensCentre for Global Health Research
Organismes subventionnairesNational Institute of Mental HealthFogarty International CenterNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchGovernment of the United Kingdom
Mots-clésPsychological interventionMedicineDelphi methodStakeholderQualitative researchHealth careIntervention (counseling)Stakeholder engagementNursingFamily medicinePublic relationsPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Introduction The burden of multimorbidity is recognised increasingly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), creating a strong emphasis on the need for effective evidence-based interventions. A core outcome set (COS) appropriate for the study of multimorbidity in LMIC contexts does not presently exist. This is required to standardise reporting and contribute to a consistent and cohesive evidence-base to inform policy and practice. We describe the development of two COS for intervention trials aimed at the prevention and treatment of multimorbidity in LMICs. Methods To generate a comprehensive list of relevant prevention and treatment outcomes, we conducted a systematic review and qualitative interviews with people with multimorbidity and their caregivers living in LMICs. We then used a modified two-round Delphi process to identify outcomes most important to four stakeholder groups with representation from 33 countries (people with multimorbidity/caregivers, multimorbidity researchers, healthcare professionals, and policy makers). Consensus meetings were used to reach agreement on the two final COS. Registration: https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1580 . Results The systematic review and qualitative interviews identified 24 outcomes for prevention and 49 for treatment of multimorbidity. An additional 12 prevention, and six treatment outcomes were added from Delphi round one. Delphi round two surveys were completed by 95 of 132 round one participants (72.0%) for prevention and 95 of 133 (71.4%) participants for treatment outcomes. Consensus meetings agreed four outcomes for the prevention COS: (1) Adverse events, (2) Development of new comorbidity, (3) Health risk behaviour, and (4) Quality of life; and four for the treatment COS: (1) Adherence to treatment, (2) Adverse events, (3) Out-of-pocket expenditure, and (4) Quality of life. Conclusion Following established guidelines, we developed two COS for trials of interventions for multimorbidity prevention and treatment, specific to LMIC contexts. We recommend their inclusion in future trials to meaningfully advance the field of multimorbidity research in LMICs. KEY MESSAGES What is already known on this topic? Although a Core Outcome Set (COS) for the study of multimorbidity has been previously developed, it does not include contributions from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Given the important differences in disease patterns and healthcare systems between high-income country (HIC) and LMIC contexts, a fit-for-purpose COS for the study of multimorbidity specific to LMICs is urgently needed. What this study adds Following rigorous guidelines and best practice recommendations for developing COS, we have identified four core outcomes for including in trials of interventions for the prevention and four for the treatment of multimorbidity in LMIC settings. The outcomes ‘Adverse events’ and ‘Quality of life (including Health-related quality of life)’ featured in both prevention and treatment COS. In addition, the prevention COS included ‘Development of new comorbidity’ and ‘Health risk behaviour’, whereas the treatment COS included ‘Adherence to treatment’ and ‘Out-of-pocket expenditure’ outcomes. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy The multimorbidity prevention and treatment COS will inform future trials and intervention study designs by helping promote consistency in outcome selection and reporting. COS for multimorbidity interventions that are context-sensitive will likely contribute to reduced research waste, harmonise outcomes to be measured across trials, and advance the field of multimorbidity research in LMIC settings to enhance health outcomes for those living with multimorbidity.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,318
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,358
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesMétarecherche
DomaineSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,682
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,841

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,3180,358
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0100,016
Bibliométrie0,0060,007
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,004
Communication savante0,0060,006
Science ouverte0,0030,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0100,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,338
Tête enseignante GPT0,485
Écart entre enseignants0,147 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; l’étiquette directe de Gemma et le classifieur distillé Codex s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
DomaineMéthodes
GenreMéthodes

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxivMême sujetChronic Disease Management StrategiesTravaux en français237 207